What if the BG tries to leave nicely?

This is a discussion on What if the BG tries to leave nicely? within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by crankshop1000 If you decide to shoot, you had better kill the BG or the lawsuit would break you. Not in MI. Originally ...

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 120

Thread: What if the BG tries to leave nicely?

  1. #31
    VIP Member Array Tubby45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Making ammo.
    Posts
    3,039
    Quote Originally Posted by crankshop1000 View Post
    If you decide to shoot, you had better kill the BG or the lawsuit would break you.
    Not in MI.

    Quote Originally Posted by David in FL View Post
    So for me, it might sound something like this.....

    "STOP, don't move! Let me explain something to you......You're in my house and by law, I can kill you right now and the only thing I have to worry about is cleaning up the mess. I don't know what you've done in my home, or what you may have stolen, so you're not leaving here. We can do this one of 2 ways. a) You can get down on your belly and wait quietly for the police, or b) I can shoot you now.....in which case I'll have to listen to my wife whine about the blood on the floor. I'd prefer "a", but it's your choice......"
    Too much talking and not enough shooting.

    Stranger in my house=shot. Period. Don't want to get shot? Don't illegally enter my house. Easy enough.
    07/02 FFL/SOT since 2006

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Distinguished Member Array kazzaerexys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,838
    I think Matt and DaveH have the best answers here. Whether you can legally shoot is a matter of your state law. As has been discussed ad nauseum in the Joe Horn threads, Texas lets you use lethal force in protection of property. Other states may as well. In that case, the very fact that the perp has committed the felony of breaking and entering gives you the legal right to shoot. In most states, though, you would be up a creek, both criminally and civilly, if you shoot a retreating man (especially if he is unarmed---if he is armed there is always the possibility he was turning to re-engage you when you pulled the trigger).

    The moral decision is your own. There is justification in removing a jackal from society, but on the flip side it is no indication of weakness to make the conscious choice not to end a life once he stops being a direct threat to you and yours.
    “What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and [...] what you want it to say?” —Justice Antonin Scalia

    SIG: P220R SS Elite SAO, P220R SAO, P220R Carry, P226R Navy, P226, P239/.40S&W, P2022/.40S&W; GSR 5", P6.

  4. #33
    VIP Member Array deadeye72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Central Mississippi
    Posts
    4,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Tubby45 View Post
    Too much talking and not enough shooting.

    Stranger in my house=shot. Period. Don't want to get shot? Don't illegally enter my house. Easy enough.
    Glock 27
    BENELLI NOVA

  5. #34
    Ron
    Ron is offline
    Distinguished Member Array Ron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    West Linn, Oregon
    Posts
    1,628
    Permit me to clarify what the so called "Castle Doctrine" actually provides in most states. It creates a legal presumption that the homeowner had a reasonable fear of death or serious personal injury from the intruder, so that it shifts the usual burden of proof from the homeowner to the prosecutor. But it is a presumption which the prosecutor can choose to attempt to rebut. In most states, it is not an absolute defense to the use of deadly force and does not sanction "murder." So, if, for example, you come home and find an intruder actually leaving your house as you enter it does not normally give you the legal right to shoot him in the back as he is leaving. Again, I am saying most states, because this may not be true in every state. And, if it is ruled that the "Castle Doctrine" is not applicable to the shooting, then you are not automaticaly protected from a subsequent civil suit.

    Ron
    "It does not do to leave a dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him."

    J. R. R. Tolkien

  6. #35
    VIP Member Array tns0038's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,117
    I look at it this way

    When I’m point a gun at this BG in my house, and order him on the grounds, his failure to comply leaves me no choice but to stop the threat.

    The safety of my family depends on immediate lethal consequence to the BG’s failure to act in accordance with my order of “on the ground”.


    Look at it this way.

    • How do you know that the BG’s action of turning around is merely to cover drawing his weapon that is hidden under his shirt?
    • How do you know that his sympathetic words of “I’ll just leave” are not to just give him time to distract you so he can draw a hidden weapon?


    Armed or unarmed, Florida’s castle doctrine is very clear on BG breaking and entering your residence, and our ability to use lethal force if necessary to protect our loved one.

    Sure, I would hate it, and I would even hate it more if later I found out he was unarmed, but the way I look at it is, I gave him a chance to live, when I ordered him on the ground.

  7. #36
    VIP Member Array Kerbouchard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,894
    This guy said all the right things, too...

    http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulle...-see-them.html
    There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.

    http://miscmusings.townhall.com/

    Who is John Galt?

  8. #37
    VIP Member Array David in FL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Tubby45 View Post
    Not in MI.


    Too much talking and not enough shooting.
    You might be right about that......

    .....but I'm serious. I really don't want to shoot anyone, if I can keep from having to. In the scenario outlined in the OP, I'd bet I could convince the BG that there are good choices and bad choices and he needed to make a good choice this time.

    Then again, maybe it ends with my wife mad at me for messing up the tile. But I really try to keep on her good side as often as I can!

  9. #38
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,093
    Texas castle doctrine ,if you enter a residence ,car,trailer with the intent to commit a crime the owner has the right to use deadly force to prevent that crime,and you cannot be sued civlly by victim or his relatives for protecting yourself or your property

  10. #39
    VIP Member Array tns0038's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,117
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerbouchard View Post
    This guy said all the right things, too...

    http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulle...-see-them.html
    Thanks, for the video link.

    And it’s exactly like I said, in the previous post.

    HOW do you know he is not just buying time, until he can get to his concealed weapon?

    In this scenario, would I shoot him for failure to comply with an order? I drought it, but in my home, I’m not even sure he would get the second warning.

  11. #40
    VIP Member Array Tubby45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Making ammo.
    Posts
    3,039
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron View Post
    Permit me to clarify what the so called "Castle Doctrine" actually provides in most states. It creates a legal presumption that the homeowner had a reasonable fear of death or serious personal injury from the intruder, so that it shifts the usual burden of proof from the homeowner to the prosecutor. But it is a presumption which the prosecutor can choose to attempt to rebut. In most states, it is not an absolute defense to the use of deadly force and does not sanction "murder." So, if, for example, you come home and find an intruder actually leaving your house as you enter it does not normally give you the legal right to shoot him in the back as he is leaving. Again, I am saying most states, because this may not be true in every state. And, if it is ruled that the "Castle Doctrine" is not applicable to the shooting, then you are not automaticaly protected from a subsequent civil suit.

    Ron
    http://www.michigan.gov/documents/ms...6_173197_7.pdf
    07/02 FFL/SOT since 2006

  12. #41
    Member Array ZW17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Central Ohio
    Posts
    53
    Ahhhh... This is what I refer to as the "Criminal Time Out" Criminals know that once their victim becomes a greater force all they need to do is drop the weapon (if they have one), turn their back to you, raise their hands, and cry "uncle" and by law in most states you cannot legally shoot.

    I have thought about this over and over and still have not come to a solid conclusion as to how I would act in this scenario. It's going to be tough not to pull the trigger once your body has had it's adrenaline dump and your mind is in full survival mode and your only train of thought is "Two to the chest, one to the head" No one trains not to shoot, we all train to shoot so putting on the breaks may be a hard thing to do under such a mountain of stress.

    I never understood how the law can expect a normal law abiding citizen to stop "The Game" (for a lack of a better term) once a bad guy has initiated such? It's not like a victim of rape can call "time out" in the middle of her attack.

    As a criminal, once you initiate a felony crime you should get no "time outs".

    Your mileage may very.
    Why do you own a fire extinguisher when you have the fire department to protect you?

  13. #42
    Member Array gotammo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    443
    Let him go the threat is over if you force him to stay you can be charged with wrongful imprisonment, kid napping, or other host of charges. let them go if he wants to the threat is over call the police give description.

  14. #43
    VIP Member Array Kerbouchard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,894
    Quote Originally Posted by gotammo View Post
    Let him go the threat is over if you force him to stay you can be charged with wrongful imprisonment, kid napping, or other host of charges. let them go if he wants to the threat is over call the police give description.
    The only place where that is even remotely true is North Carolina. You can not be charged with kidnapping, wrongful imprisonment or any other such nonsense in most states for simply holding somebody on your property until police arrive. It's the same reason a store owner can hold you for suspicion of shoplifting, until the police arrive. If you were to try to transport him, kidnapping could come into play, but there's no reason to take him to the police station yourself...wait for LEO to get there.

    Somebody is not leaving with my property, unless it's the LEO who needed it for evidence as to why I shot the guy. If you want to let him go, that's your decision. As it would have to be a decision each and every one of us would have to make based on our moral outlook, state laws, and particular sitution.
    There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.

    http://miscmusings.townhall.com/

    Who is John Galt?

  15. #44
    Distinguished Member Array kazzaerexys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,838
    Quote Originally Posted by ZW17 View Post
    No one trains not to shoot, we all train to shoot [...]
    Hmmm, well, this may be kind of a fine hair to split, but I think I am going to have to disagree here.

    Most of my practice drawing from the holster is not draw-to-shoot. It is draw-to-aim. I am not conditioning myself to have to go click at the end of the presentation. Maybe a third of the time I will practice pulling the trigger at the end of my draw.

    At the range, I practice having my finger on the frame when not consciously ready to pull the trigger. I practice decocking if I am not immediately going to break another shot. I practice going to low-ready if I am not intentionally keeping the gun on target.

    This may not be exactly what you meant, ZW, but in my mind it means that I am most definitely training not to shoot just as much as I am training to shoot well when I choose to pull the trigger.

    For what it is worth, if one lives in a place where a local DA is likely to press charges over anything less than a squeaky clean SD shoot (and maybe even then ), the sort of posts that say, "I shoot immediately" may actually end up being used as evidence of premeditation or recklessness. The DA would argue that the poster was just "looking for an opportunity to pull that trigger" and that he never stopped to consider the situation actually confronting him.
    “What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and [...] what you want it to say?” —Justice Antonin Scalia

    SIG: P220R SS Elite SAO, P220R SAO, P220R Carry, P226R Navy, P226, P239/.40S&W, P2022/.40S&W; GSR 5", P6.

  16. #45
    Member Array ZW17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Central Ohio
    Posts
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by kazzaerexys View Post
    Hmmm, well, this may be kind of a fine hair to split, but I think I am going to have to disagree here.

    Most of my practice drawing from the holster is not draw-to-shoot. It is draw-to-aim. I am not conditioning myself to have to go click at the end of the presentation. Maybe a third of the time I will practice pulling the trigger at the end of my draw.

    At the range, I practice having my finger on the frame when not consciously ready to pull the trigger. I practice decocking if I am not immediately going to break another shot. I practice going to low-ready if I am not intentionally keeping the gun on target.

    This may not be exactly what you meant, ZW, but in my mind it means that I am most definitely training not to shoot just as much as I am training to shoot well when I choose to pull the trigger.

    For what it is worth, if one lives in a place where a local DA is likely to press charges over anything less than a squeaky clean SD shoot (and maybe even then ), the sort of posts that say, "I shoot immediately" may actually end up being used as evidence of premeditation or recklessness. The DA would argue that the poster was just "looking for an opportunity to pull that trigger" and that he never stopped to consider the situation actually confronting him.
    I agree and disagree at the same time.

    Where I practice shooting (indoor range) I don't have the ability to practice like one would like to with room by room clearing, with targets that look like the BG holding a gun and others may be a little girl holding school books, etc... Those courses are the ones that will test your ability to size up the situation and make a split second determination as to shoot or not to shoot.

    At a regular range you are not conditioning your mind for a good/bad shoot situation, you are practicing putting lead on target, sight alignment, draw technique, etc... All of which are "to shoot" and not conditioning the mind to size up the situation before pulling the trigger. How could you expect that though when all you have is a piece of paper 21' out?

    As a instructor once told me... You should never even break leather unless you have already committed to pulling the trigger. I am a firm believer in that. You use every tool available before drawing a gun, drawing is your last and final resort and you draw to shoot and end a threat, it's not a tool to wave around and convince someone to comply with demands (ie. hands above your head, wait for the police) Again, it's a tool to end a threat.

    In 5yrs of carry, I have never broke leather and instead used my head, mouth, and feet to avoid trouble. There was one incident where I could have legally drawn but chose not to as I wasn't going to shoot and didn't want to risk escalating the situation. It ended up costing me $300 in stolen tools and the thief got away, but I lived to protect my loved ones another day, that is all that matters when it is all said and done and I bet we can both agree on that.
    Why do you own a fire extinguisher when you have the fire department to protect you?

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Please leave the dog home
    By HKinNY in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: October 15th, 2009, 06:13 PM
  2. Do I leave it with her?
    By spydad in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: September 3rd, 2009, 12:57 PM
  3. Before I leave for Bavaria...
    By Duisburg in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: December 27th, 2007, 03:04 PM
  4. Would you leave the scene?
    By fairway1 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: November 28th, 2007, 10:51 AM
  5. how to leave it in your car
    By friesepferd in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: November 27th, 2007, 02:34 PM

Search tags for this page

mocastledoc

Click on a term to search for related topics.